1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 23, 2015, the Plaintiff obtained a license for the electricity business for solar power generation of 996kW on the ground (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) from the Do governor of the Gyeongnam-si, Seoul, D, and E (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”).

B. On January 9, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for permission to engage in development activities to install solar power generation facilities on each of the instant land (hereinafter “instant application”). On February 23, 2017, the SiarGun Planning Committee rejected the deliberation on the instant application on the grounds of “constition on natural environment damage, and the creation with surrounding landscapes,” etc.

C. Accordingly, on March 6, 2017, the Defendant rejected the instant application against the Plaintiff for the following reasons.

(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition in this case"). [Grounds for non-repair] The large solar power generation projects over three occasions around F with high preservation value are worthy of non-conformity with the permission for development activities under Article 58 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter referred to as the "National Land Planning Act") and attached Table 1-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (hereinafter referred to as the "National Land Planning and Utilization Act") and the purport of the entire pleadings as a whole, the fact that the damaged nature caused by a long-term project has no dispute about "non-conformity" [the grounds for recognition] as a result of the deliberation by the Saro Gun Planning Committee under Article 59 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, the entry (including the number of copies; hereinafter the same shall apply) of the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, and the whole purport of arguments.

2. The attachment to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of this case is unclear, and even if the grounds for disposition are satisfied with the criteria for permission for development activities, there is an error of law that deviates from and abused discretionary power.

B. Determination 1: Article 56(1)1 and 2, and Article 58(1)4 and (3) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act; Article 56 of the Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act.